Slashdot Mirror
Viacom vs. YouTube - Whose Side Are You On?
DigitalDame2 writes "Lance Ulanoff of PCMag believes that the Viacom and YouTube lawsuit is a bad idea because it has the potential to damage the burgeoning online video business; instead, it could work with the millions of people who are currently viewing Viacom content on YouTube. On the other side, Jim Louderback, an editor-in-chief of PCMag says that Lance doesn't know what he's talking about: with all the content available online for free, Viacom can kiss those investments goodbye. YouTube is actively filtering, actively allowing uploads, and making money off of the content that's been uploaded. The courts will find that Viacom has been wronged, that Google has not done enough to protect the rights of copyright holders, and that Google owes Viacom reparations. Whose side are you on?"
...if you're going for the Nazi's or the Allies
Their real problem is that the public at large do not respect copyright as Viacom and others would like to define it.
Yes, they do. You don't, and most slashdotters dont, but many people, I'd wager most, do. I know a guy, who I'd describe as typical, who was apprehensive about borrowing a blockbuster tape I'd rented to watch - because he hadnt paid to rent it.
People are not naturally thieves, despite the fact that shoplifting happens every day. Most people - good people - would feel ashamed after walking out of a store, and realizing they forgot to pay for something. Many of them go back to make up the difference. They need no law officer to make them do this, their conscience is enough.
Now of course, we're very left here. So we don't believe in "good" or "evil" or "consciences" or "morality". Everything's relative. Spiderman 2 sucked, therefore I shouldn't pay for it. Britney only has one good song, therefore I shouldnt pay for her CD. It's a bunch of excuses and relativistic bullshit lies.
They recognize that the show they're watching took resources to make, actors and crew were paid, sets were built, locations were rented, make up was done, etc. They feel guilty stealing that. Yes, they feel actual guilt. They feel it is a moral wrong to watch that show for free, when they know it's against the owners wishes.
Yeah, there are assholes who have no problem sneaking in the fire exit at the movie theater. It happens, it doesn't mean movie theatres shouldn't charge admission, and shouldn't prosecute people sneaking in.
Why would "the public" embrace iTunes, when they were so used to getting mp3s free? The public was clamoring way to pay for music online.
"The public" will feel that viacom has been wronged - that google wrongly (and knowingly) allowed their copyrighted content to remain online, because google knew they could profit from it. Google knows they profit more from Daily Show clips than they do from Anne McEmo's video blog.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!